Cerebral Embolic Protection during Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) for the treatment of aortic stenosis can lead to embolization of debris. Capture of debris by devices that provide cerebral embolic protection (CEP) may reduce the risk of stroke. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with aortic stenosis in a 1:1 ratio to undergo transfemoral TAVR with CEP (CEP group) or without CEP (control group). The primary end point was stroke within 72 hours after TAVR or before discharge (whichever came first) in the intention-to-treat population. Disabling stroke, death, transient ischemic attack, delirium, major or minor vascular complications at the CEP access site, and acute kidney injury were also assessed. A neurology professional examined all the patients at baseline and after TAVR. RESULTS: A total of 3000 patients across North America, Europe, and Australia underwent randomization; 1501 were assigned to the CEP group and 1499 to the control group. A CEP device was successfully deployed in 1406 of the 1489 patients (94.4%) in whom an attempt was made. The incidence of stroke within 72 hours after TAVR or before discharge did not differ significantly between the CEP group and the control group (2.3% vs. 2.9%; difference, -0.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -1.7 to 0.5; P = 0.30). Disabling stroke occurred in 0.5% of the patients in the CEP group and in 1.3% of those in the control group. There were no substantial differences between the CEP group and the control group in the percentage of patients who died (0.5% vs. 0.3%); had a stroke, a transient ischemic attack, or delirium (3.1% vs. 3.7%); or had acute kidney injury (0.5% vs. 0.5%). One patient (0.1%) had a vascular complication at the CEP access site. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral TAVR, the use of CEP did not have a significant effect on the incidence of periprocedural stroke, but on the basis of the 95% confidence interval around this outcome, the results may not rule out a benefit of CEP during TAVR. (Funded by Boston Scientific; PROTECTED TAVR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04149535.).

Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon vs Uncoated Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: The AGENT IDE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Drug-coated balloons offer a potentially beneficial treatment strategy for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis. However, none have been previously evaluated or approved for use in coronary circulation in the United States. Objective: To evaluate whether a paclitaxel-coated balloon is superior to an uncoated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants: AGENT IDE, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, enrolled 600 patients with in-stent restenosis (lesion length <26 mm and reference vessel diameter >2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm) at 40 centers across the United States between May 2021 and August 2022. One-year clinical follow-up was completed on October 2, 2023. Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 2:1 allocation to undergo treatment with a paclitaxel-coated (n = 406) or an uncoated (n = 194) balloon. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of 1-year target lesion failure-defined as the composite of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death-was tested for superiority. Results: Among 600 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 157 females [26.2%]; 42 Black [7%], 35 Hispanic [6%] individuals), 574 (95.7%) completed 1-year follow-up. The primary end point at 1 year occurred in 17.9% in the paclitaxel-coated balloon group vs 28.6% in the uncoated balloon group, meeting the criteria for superiority (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.84]; 2-sided P = .003). Target lesion revascularization (13.0% vs 24.7%; HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.74]; P = .001) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (5.8% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.28-0.92]; P = .02) occurred less frequently among patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. The rate of cardiac death was 2.9% vs 1.6% (HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.49-6.28]; P = .38) in the coated vs uncoated balloon groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for in-stent restenosis, a paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to an uncoated balloon with respect to the composite end point of target lesion failure. Paclitaxel-coated balloons are an effective treatment option for patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04647253.

Rationale and design of a randomized study comparing the Watchman FLX device to DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) was developed as a nonpharmacologic alternative to oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are at an increased risk for stroke or systemic embolism. The Watchman device permanently seals off the LAA to prevent thrombi from escaping into the circulation. Previous randomized trials have established the safety and efficacy of LAAC compared to warfarin. However, direct OACs (DOACs) have become the preferred pharmacologic strategy for stroke prevention in patients with AF, and there is limited data comparing Watchman FLX to DOACs in a broad AF patient population. CHAMPION-AF is designed to prospectively determine whether LAAC with Watchman FLX is a reasonable first-line alternative to DOACs in patients with AF who are indicated for OAC therapy. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 3,000 patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women) were randomized to Watchman FLX or DOAC in a 1:1 allocation at 142 global clinical sites. Patients in the device arm were to be treated with DOAC and aspirin, DOAC alone, or DAPT for at least 3 months postimplant followed by aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor for 1-year. Control patients were required to take an approved DOAC for the duration of the trial. Clinical follow-up visits are scheduled at 3- and 12-months, and then annually through 5 years; LAA imaging is required at 4 months in the device group. Two primary end points will be evaluated at 3 years: (1) composite of stroke (ischemic/hemorrhagic), cardiovascular death, and systemic embolism compared for noninferiority, and (2) nonprocedural bleeding (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis [ISTH] major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding) tested for superiority in the device arm against DOACs. The third primary noninferiority end point is the composite of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism at 5 years. Secondary end points include 3- and 5-year rates of (1) ISTH-defined major bleeding and (2) the composite of cardiovascular death, all stroke, systemic embolism, and nonprocedural ISTH bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: This study will prospectively evaluate whether LAAC with the Watchman FLX device is a reasonable alternative to DOACs in patients with AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04394546.

Real-world clinical outcomes with a next-generation left atrial appendage closure device: the FLXibility Post-Approval Study.

AIMS: The FLXibility Post-Approval Study collected data on unselected patients implanted with a WATCHMAN FLX in a commercial clinical setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were implanted with a WATCHMAN FLX per local standard of care, with a subsequent first follow-up visit from 45 to 120 days post-implant and a final follow-up at 1-year post-procedure. A Clinical Event Committee adjudicated all major adverse events and TEE/CT imaging results were adjudicated by a core laboratory. Among 300 patients enrolled at 17 centres in Europe, the mean age was 74.6 ± 8.0 years, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.3 ± 1.6, and 62.1% were male. The device was successfully implanted in 99.0% (297/300) of patients. The post-implant medication regimen was DAPT for 87.3% (262/300). At first follow-up, core-lab adjudicated complete seal was 88.2% (149/169), 9.5% (16/169) had leak <3 mm, 2.4 (4/169) had leak ≥3 mm to ≤5 mm, and 0% had >5 mm leak. At 1 year, 93.3% (280/300) had final follow-up; 60.5% of patients were on a single antiplatelet medication, 21.4% were on DAPT, 5.6% were on direct oral anticoagulation, and 12.1% were not taking any antiplatelet/anticoagulation medication. Adverse event rates through 1 year were: all-cause death 10.8% (32/295); CV/unexplained death 5.1% (15/295); disabling and non-disabling stroke each 1.0% (3/295, all non-fatal); pericardial effusion requiring surgery or pericardiocentesis 1.0% (3/295); and device-related thrombus 2.4% (7/295). CONCLUSION: The WATCHMAN FLX device had excellent procedural success rates, high LAA seal rates, and low rates of thromboembolic events in everyday clinical practice.

Drug-Coated Balloon for the Treatment of Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease　- A Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have shown promising results for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and small vessel disease (SVD). However, data comparing the treatment efficacy of different DCBs are limited.Methods and Results: AGENT Japan is a prospective randomized controlled trial that compares the Agent balloon coated with a low-dose formulation of paclitaxel (2 µg/mm2) to the SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon (3 µg/mm2) for the treatment of SVD. Patients with target lesion length ≤28 mm and reference diameter between ≥2.00 and <3.00 mm were randomized 2 : 1 for treatment with Agent (n=101) or SeQuent Please (n=49). This trial also includes a separate single-arm substudy evaluating the clinical safety and effectiveness of Agent in patients with ISR. The primary endpoint of 6-month target lesion failure (TLF) was observed in 3.0% of Agent and 0.0% of SeQuent Please patients (difference=3.0%; 97.5% upper confidence bound [UCB]=9.57%, which is less than the prespecified margin of 13.2%; Pnon-inferiority=0.0012). There were no deaths or thrombosis, and angiographic and quality-of-life outcomes were comparable between groups. The AGENT Japan ISR substudy (n=30) primary endpoint was met because the one-sided 97.5% UCB for 6-month TLF (3.3%) was significantly less than the study success criterion of 15.1% (97.5% UCB=9.8%; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study demonstrate good clinical outcomes with the Agent DCB when used to treat patients with SVD or ISR.

Primary Outcome Evaluation of a Next-Generation Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device: Results From the PINNACLE FLX Trial.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion provides an alternative to oral anticoagulation for thromboembolic risk reduction in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Since regulatory approval in 2015, the WATCHMAN device has been the only LAA closure device available for clinical use in the United States. The PINNACLE FLX study (Protection Against Embolism for Nonvalvular AF Patients: Investigational Device Evaluation of the Watchman FLX LAA Closure Technology) evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the next-generation WATCHMAN FLX LAA closure device in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in whom oral anticoagulation is indicated, but who have an appropriate rationale to seek a nonpharmaceutical alternative. METHODS: This was a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter US Food and Drug Administration study. The primary safety end point was the occurrence of one of the following events within 7 days after the procedure or by hospital discharge, whichever was later: death, ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, or device- or procedure-related events requiring cardiac surgery. The primary effectiveness end point was the incidence of effective LAA closure (peri-device flow ≤5 mm), as assessed by the echocardiography core laboratory at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 400 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 73.8±8.6 years and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.2±1.5. The incidence of the primary safety end point was 0.5% with a 1-sided 95% upper CI of 1.6%, meeting the performance goal of 4.2% (P<0.0001). The incidence of the primary effectiveness end point was 100%, with a 1-sided 95% lower CI of 99.1%, again meeting the performance goal of 97.0% (P<0.0001). Device-related thrombus was reported in 7 patients, no patients experienced pericardial effusion requiring open cardiac surgery, and there were no device embolizations. CONCLUSIONS: LAA closure with this next-generation LAA closure device was associated with a low incidence of adverse events and a high incidence of anatomic closure. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02702271.

Comparison of anticoagulation with left atrial appendage closure after atrial fibrillation ablation: Rationale and design of the OPTION randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF), physicians typically offer AF ablation for symptom relief; however, patients often anticipate/expect a life free from anticoagulation. This belief puts patients at increased risk of stroke due to the potential for asymptomatic AF postablation if anticoagulation is ceased contrary to clinical guidelines. Although the WATCHMAN device has been FDA-approved to decrease the risk of thromboembolism from the left atrial appendage (LAA) in patients with an appropriate rationale to avoid oral anticoagulation, it has not been well-studied following AF ablation. Additionally, there are limited data comparing the WATCHMAN device to direct oral anticoagulants. The OPTION study will investigate whether LAA closure with the WATCHMAN FLX device is a reasonable alternative to oral anticoagulation following percutaneous catheter ablation for nonvalvular AF. TRIAL DESIGN: OPTION is a multinational, multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial. Patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc of ≥2 in men or ≥3 in women and who underwent a AF catheter ablation procedure between 90 and 180 days prior to randomization (sequential) or are planning to have catheter ablation within 10 days of randomization (concomitant) will be randomized in a 1:1 allocation of WATCHMAN FLX vs control. Control patients will start or continue market-approved oral anticoagulation for the duration of the trial. A total of 1600 patients were randomized from 130 global investigational sites. Follow-up for both device and control patients will occur at 3, 12, 24, and 36 months. The primary effectiveness noninferiority endpoint is stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), all-cause death, or systemic embolism at 36 months. The primary safety superiority endpoint is nonprocedural bleeding through 36 months (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis [ISTH] major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding). The secondary noninferiority endpoint is ISTH major bleeding through 36 months (including procedural bleeding). CONCLUSIONS: This trial will assess the safety and efficacy of WATCHMAN FLX in a postablation contemporary clinical AF patient population at risk of stroke.

Rationale and design of a randomized study comparing the agent drug coated balloon to plain old balloon angioplasty in patients with In-stent restenosis.

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) technology was developed as an alternative treatment for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and in-stent restenosis (ISR). Management of coronary ISR is clinically challenging and frequently encountered in practice. The Agent DCB uses an inactive excipient to effectively deliver a targeted, therapeutic dose of paclitaxel to the vessel wall. STUDY DESIGN: AGENT IDE is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial to evaluate superiority of the Agent DCB to balloon angioplasty in treating patients with ISR. A total of 480 patients with ISR of a previously treated lesion length <26 mm and reference vessel diameter >2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm will be initially randomized. Subjects presenting with recent myocardial infarction (MI), complex lesions, or thrombus in the target vessel will be excluded. An adaptive group sequential design with one formal interim analysis for sample size re-estimation will be conducted, and the sample size may be increased to a maximum of 600 subjects. The primary endpoint is the rate of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF; composite of any ischemia-driven revascularization of the target lesion (TLR), target vessel related MI, or cardiac death) and will be tested for superiority in the test arm against the control. Functional status and general health-related quality of life will be measured by changes in the EQ-5D scores. Subjects will be followed for 5 years following the index procedure. CONCLUSION: This study will prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of Agent DCB in patients treated for coronary ISR.

Does study subject diversity influence cardiology research site performance?: Insights from 2 U.S. National Coronary Stent Registries.

BACKGROUND: Minorities and women are underrepresented in cardiovascular research. Whether their higher enrollment can be predicted or influences research site performance is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated 104 sites that enrolled 4,184 patients in the U.S. Platinum Diversity (PD) and Promus Element Plus (PE Plus) studies (2012 to 2016). Research sites were ranked from lowest to highest minority and female enrollment, respectively. United States Census Bureau division and core-based statistical area (CBSA) populations were determined for each site and the following study performance metrics compared across quartiles of minority and female enrollment, respectively: (1) study subject enrollment rate (SER), (2) time to first patient enrolled, (3) rate of follow-up visits not done, (4) rate of follow-up visits out of window, and (5) protocol deviation rate (PDR). Multivariable regression was used to predict SER and PDR. RESULTS: Minority enrollment varied by region (P = .025) and population (P = .024) with highest recruitment noted in the Pacific, West South Central, South Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic and East North Central divisions. Female enrollment bore no relationship to region (P = .67) or population (P = .40). Median SER was similar in sites withi the highest vs lowest quartile of minority enrollment (SER of 4 vs 5 patients per month, respectively, P =0.78) and highest vs. lowest female enrollment (SER of 4 vs 4, respectively, P = .21). Median PDR was lower in sites within the highest vs lowest minority enrollment (0.23 vs 0.50 PDs per patient per month, respectively, P = .01) and highest vs. lowest female enrollment (0.28 vs. 0.37 PDs per patient per month, respectively, P = .04). However, this relationship did not persist after multivariable adjustment. All other site performance metrics were comparable across quartiles of minority and female enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Minority, but not female enrollment, correlated with research site geographic region and surrounding population. High enrollment of minorities and women did not influence study performance metrics. These findings help inform future strategies aimed at increasing clinical trial diversity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PD and PE Plus studies are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov under identifiers NCT02240810 and NCT01589978, respectively. KEY POINTS: Question: Does the enrollment of more Blacks, Hispanics and women in US cardiovascular research studies influence the overall rate of study subject enrollment and/or other key study site performance metrics and can diverse enrollment be predicted? FINDINGS: In this pooled analysis of 104 sites that enrolled 4,184 patients in the Platinum Diversity and Promus Element Plus Post-Approval Studies, we found that the enrollment of higher proportions of underrepresented minorities and women was univariately associated with lower protocol deviation rates while having no effect on other site performance metrics. A site's geographic location and surrounding population predicted minority, but not female enrollment. Meaning: These findings suggest that cardiovascular research subject diversity may be predicted from site characteristics and enhanced without compromising key study performance metrics. These insights help inform future strategies aimed at improving clinical trial diversity.

Insights on Embolic Protection, Repositioning, and Stroke: A Subanalysis of the RESPOND Study.

RESPOND is a prospective, single-arm study enrolling 1014 transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients. The objective of this analysis is to assess the impact of cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices and prosthetic valve repositioning on the risk of neurologic complications in patients treated with the fully repositionable Lotus Valve in the RESPOND postmarket study. Valve repositioning and CEP use were at the operators' discretion. Stroke events were adjudicated by an independent medical reviewer. This analysis assessed the baseline differences among patients according to CEP use and valve repositioning and evaluated the neurological complications at 72 hours after TAVR, hospital discharge, and 30-day follow-up. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify the potential predictors of stroke. Of the 996 patients implanted with the Lotus Valve (mean age: 80.8 years, 50.8% female, STS score 6.0 ± 6.9), 92 cases (9.2%) used CEP. The overall rate of acute stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) was 3.0% at 72 hours after TAVR. The 72-hour stroke/TIA rate was 1.1% in patients who had CEP and 3.2% in those who did not. Use of CEP was associated with a 2.1% absolute reduction in the risk of acute neurological events (relative risk reduction: 65.6%), although the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.51). Repositioning of the Lotus Valve occurred in 313/996 procedures (31.4%). The 72-hour rate of stroke/TIA was similar in patients who had valve repositioning (2.9%) compared with those who did not (3.1%; p=0.86). The selective use of a CEP device in the RESPOND study was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk for stroke within 72 hours. The use of the repositioning feature of the Lotus Valve did not increase the stroke risk.

Hemodynamic and Echocardiographic Comparison of the Lotus and CoreValve Transcatheter Aortic Valves in Patients With High and Extreme Surgical Risk: An Analysis From the REPRISE III Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Comparative echocardiographic data on transcatheter aortic valve replacement systems from randomized trials are limited. The REPRISE III trial (Repositionable Percutaneous Replacement of Stenotic Aortic Valve through Implantation of Lotus Valve System - Randomized Clinical Evaluation) is a multicenter, randomized comparison of a mechanically expanded (Lotus) versus self-expanding (CoreValve) transcatheter aortic valve replacement device. This analysis rigorously assesses Doppler-derived valve hemodynamics and the impact on outcomes at 1 year in patients with extreme/high surgical risk treated with Lotus and CoreValve from REPRISE III. METHODS: REPRISE III includes patients with extreme- and high-risk aortic stenosis. Patients were enrolled at 55 centers. All transthoracic echocardiograms with Doppler were obtained following a standard protocol up to 12 months postimplant and analyzed by a core laboratory. Valve size, mean gradient, aortic valve area, and Doppler velocity index and their impact on clinical outcomes are reported. Additional parameters including paravalvular leak were evaluated using a multiparametric approach. RESULTS: A total of 912 patients were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio; 607 Lotus:305 CoreValve). Median age was 84 years, 51% of the patients were women, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 6.8±4.1. CoreValve demonstrated lower gradients and larger aortic valve area and Doppler velocity index than Lotus at discharge; the difference decreased in subsequent follow-up up to a year (all P<0.01). Lotus had lower rates of paravalvular leak that persisted over time (P<0.05). Similar outcomes were seen when comparing each valve type by size group (small, medium, large). The hemodynamic differences between valves did not translate into worse clinical outcomes. All-cause mortality was not different between the 2 groups in any of the 3 valve sizes. When comparing patients with normal valve gradients (<20 mm Hg, n=780) with those with abnormal gradients (>20 mm Hg, n=48) in the entire patient population, all-cause mortality was not different. This was also not significant when evaluating each valve type separately. Similarly, there were no differences for aortic valve area >1.1 cm2 or <1.1 cm2 and for Doppler velocity index >0.35 or <0.35 (all P=not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Lotus had significantly greater freedom from moderate or severe paravalvular leak and smaller valve area and higher gradients than CoreValve. The hemodynamic differences were not associated with any clinical differences in the composite end point of mortality, disabling stroke, and moderate paravalvular leak or with quality of life at 1 year of follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02202434.

Clinical outcomes of the Lotus Valve in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: An analysis from the RESPOND study.

AIMS: Patients with bicuspid valves represent a challenging anatomical subgroup for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). This analysis evaluated the clinical outcomes of the fully repositionable and retrievable Lotus Valve System in patients with bicuspid aortic valves enrolled in the RESPOND post-market registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prospective, open-label RESPOND study enrolled 1,014 patients at 41 centers in Europe, New Zealand, and Latin America, 31 (3.1%) of whom had bicuspid aortic valves. The mean age in the bicuspid patient cohort was 76.4 years, 64.5% were male, and the baseline STS score was 6.0 ± 10.2. Procedural success was 100%, with no cases of malpositioning, valve migration, embolization, or valve-in-valve. Repositioning was attempted in 10 cases (32.3%). There was one death (3.2%) and one stroke (3.2%) at 30-day follow-up. Mean AV gradient was reduced from 48.7 ± 17.0 mmHg at baseline to 11.8 ± 5.1 mmHg at hospital discharge (P < 0.001); mean effective orifice area (EOA) was increased from 0.6 ± 0.2 cm2 to 1.7 ± 0.4 cm2 (P < 0.001). There were no cases of moderate or severe paravalvular leak (PVL) adjudicated by the core laboratory; four subjects (13.8%) had mild PVL, 5 (17.2%) had trace PVL. The rate of pacemaker (PM) implantation for PM-naïve patients was 22.2% (6/27). CONCLUSIONS: Data from the RESPOND registry demonstrate good clinical and echocardiographic outcomes up to 1 year postimplantation in patients with bicuspid aortic valves using the repositionable Lotus Valve.

Clinical outcomes in unselected patients treated with the PROMUS Element platinum-chromium, everolimus-eluting stent: Final five-year results from the PE PROVE Study.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this analysis was to evaluate the final 5-year safety and effectiveness of the PROMUS Element platinum-chromium everolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients treated in routine clinical practice. BACKGROUND: The prospective, open-label PROMUS Element™ European Post-Approval Surveillance Study (PE-PROVE) enrolled 1,010 "real-world" patients who received the PROMUS Element stent. Adverse event rates were low at 1-year, and the incidence of stent thrombosis was 0.6%. METHODS: The primary endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF; overall and PE stent-related), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) related to the target vessel, or target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 1-year post-implantation. Five-year clinical outcomes were evaluated in overall as well as high-risk patient subgroups. RESULTS: The overall 5-year TVF rate was 14.9%, with 7.0% being related to the study stent. Cardiac death, MI and TVR related to the study stent occurred in 0.5%, 3.2%, and 5.7%, respectively. Stent thrombosis through 5-year follow-up was 1.0%. The rates of overall and study stent related TVF were numerically higher in patients with medically treated diabetes, long lesions (≥28 mm), and small diameter vessels (≤2.5 mm) compared to the overall study population. Additionally, favorable stent thrombosis rates through 5 years were reported for the PROMUS Element stent in these high-risk subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The final 5-year data from the PE-PROVE study demonstrate favorable outcomes and low rates of adverse events with the PE stent when used in "real-world" patients with coronary artery disease.

Rationale and design of the EVOLVE Short DAPT Study to assess 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy in subjects at high risk for bleeding undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: While extended dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a platelet (P2Y12) inhibitor after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces the risk of stent thrombosis (ST) and myocardial infarction (MI), it also increases bleeding. Newer generation drug-eluting stents with bioabsorbable polymer coatings may reduce thrombotic events and allow abbreviated DAPT in selected patients. The EVOLVE Short DAPT study is designed to evaluate the safety of 3-month DAPT in high bleeding risk subjects treated with the SYNERGY bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. TRIAL DESIGN: EVOLVE Short DAPT is a prospective, single-arm, international study that enrolled 2009 high risk bleeding subjects (defined as age ≥75 years, chronic anticoagulation, major bleeding within 12 months, history of stroke, renal insufficiency/failure, or thrombocytopenia) who underwent PCI with the SYNERGY stent. Subjects presenting with acute MI or complex lesions were excluded. After 3 months treatment with DAPT (except those on anticoagulant in whom aspirin is optional), subjects free from stroke, MI, revascularization or ST will be eligible to discontinue P2Y12 inhibitor, but continue aspirin. Co-primary endpoints assessed between 3-15 months are: i) death/MI compared for non-inferiority with propensity-adjusted historical group receiving 12-month DAPT, and ii) definite/probable ST compared to a performance goal. The secondary endpoint is the rate of bleeding in subjects not receiving chronic anticoagulation compared for superiority against a propensity-adjusted historical control. CONCLUSION: The EVOLVE Short DAPT study will prospectively define the safety of DAPT discontinuation at 3 months in high bleeding risk patients treated with the SYNERGY stent.

The East-West late lumen loss study: Comparison of angiographic late lumen loss between Eastern and Western drug-eluting stent study cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Regulatory decisions approving new coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) require mechanistic observations of angiographic late lumen loss (LLL). Patient safety and device approval times could be enhanced if angiographic follow-up data were found to be generalizable across jurisdictions and geographies. The objectives were to assess the comparability of in-segment LLL in Eastern and Western DES populations using the world's largest compilation of follow-up quantitative coronary angiography data. METHODS: Data from 4 manufacturers involving 29 DES clinical trials in Eastern and Western hemispheres were compiled. "East" and "West" cohorts were defined by trial location. Independent core laboratories quantified in-segment LLL for all studies. East and West were compared before and after adjustment for clinical and anatomic covariates known to correlate with LLL via conditioning on propensity score quintiles. An international panel of experts and regulators prospectively established a clinically meaningful difference between East and West mean in-segment LLL of ±0.40 mm. RESULTS: The data set comprised 2,047 East and 4,456 West patients. Unadjusted mean ± SD for West and East in-segment LLL (mm) was 0.25 ± 0.46 and 0.12 ± 0.42, respectively (difference 0.13 mm; 95% CI 0.11-0.16). Propensity score-adjusted in-segment LLL East and West least squares means were 0.11 and 0.26 mm, respectively (difference 0.15 mm; 95% CI 0.13-0.18). CONCLUSIONS: In the world's largest compilation of DES protocol 8- to 13-month angiographic follow-up data, clinically meaningful comparability of in-segment LLL by independent core laboratory quantitative coronary angiography in East and West cohorts was demonstrated in both unadjusted and adjusted comparisons. These findings suggest that DES LLL, once characterized, could be generalized across regulatory jurisdictions over the course of global registration efforts.

Safety and efficacy of a repositionable and fully retrievable aortic valve used in routine clinical practice: the RESPOND Study.

AIMS: RESPOND is a prospective, open-label, single-arm study evaluating the outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the repositionable and fully retrievable Lotus Valve used in routine clinical practice for the treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: RESPOND enrolled 1014 patients at sites across Europe, New Zealand, and Latin America; 996 patients received a Lotus Valve (mean age: 80.8 years; 50.8% female; Society of Thoracic Surgeons score: 6.0 ± 6.9). Repositioning was attempted in 29.2% of patients, with 99% success. The rate of all-cause mortality in the intent-to-treat population at 30 days (primary endpoint) was 2.6% (P < 0.001 vs. pre-specified performance goal). Thirty-day clinical follow-up was completed for 97.3% of patients. Among patients who received a Lotus Valve, the 30-day overall and disabling stroke rates were 3.0% and 2.2%, respectively. The 30-day permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 30.0% in all patients, and 34.6% in pacemaker-naïve patients. Echocardiographic data at baseline and pre-discharge were assessed by an independent core laboratory. Mean aortic valve gradient declined from 37.7 ± 15.2 mmHg at baseline to 10.8 ± 4.6 mmHg at hospital discharge (P < 0.001). Aortic valve area increased from 0.7 ± 0.2 cm2 at baseline to 1.8 ± 0.4 cm2 at discharge (P < 0.001). At hospital discharge, paravalvular leak (PVL) was absent or trace in 92% of patients; no patients had severe PVL, 0.3% of patients exhibited moderate PVL, and 7.7% of patients had mild PVL. Clinical follow-up in RESPOND will extend to 5 years. CONCLUSION: The results of RESPOND confirm the safety and efficacy of TAVI with the Lotus Valve in routine clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT 02031302.

Effect of Mechanically Expanded vs Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement on Mortality and Major Adverse Clinical Events in High-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis: The REPRISE III Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is established for selected patients with severe aortic stenosis. However, limitations such as suboptimal deployment, conduction disturbances, and paravalvular leak occur. Objective: To evaluate if a mechanically expanded valve (MEV) is noninferior to an approved self-expanding valve (SEV) in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR. Design, Setting, and Participants: The REPRISE III trial was conducted in 912 patients with high or extreme risk and severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at 55 centers in North America, Europe, and Australia between September 22, 2014, and December 24, 2015, with final follow-up on March 8, 2017. Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either an MEV (n = 607) or an SEV (n = 305). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary safety end point was the 30-day composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, life-threatening or major bleeding, stage 2/3 acute kidney injury, and major vascular complications tested for noninferiority (margin, 10.5%). The primary effectiveness end point was the 1-year composite of all-cause mortality, disabling stroke, and moderate or greater paravalvular leak tested for noninferiority (margin, 9.5%). If noninferiority criteria were met, the secondary end point of 1-year moderate or greater paravalvular leak was tested for superiority in the full analysis data set. Results: Among 912 randomized patients (mean age, 82.8 [SD, 7.3] years; 463 [51%] women; predicted risk of mortality, 6.8%), 874 (96%) were evaluable at 1 year. The primary safety composite end point at 30 days occurred in 20.3% of MEV patients and 17.2% of SEV patients (difference, 3.1%; Farrington-Manning 97.5% CI, -∞ to 8.3%; P = .003 for noninferiority). At 1 year, the primary effectiveness composite end point occurred in 15.4% with the MEV and 25.5% with the SEV (difference, -10.1%; Farrington-Manning 97.5% CI, -∞ to -4.4%; P<.001 for noninferiority). The 1-year rates of moderate or severe paravalvular leak were 0.9% for the MEV and 6.8% for the SEV (difference, -6.1%; 95% CI, -9.6% to -2.6%; P < .001). The superiority analysis for primary effectiveness was statistically significant (difference, -10.2%; 95% CI, -16.3% to -4.0%; P < .001). The MEV had higher rates of new pacemaker implants (35.5% vs 19.6%; P < .001) and valve thrombosis (1.5% vs 0%) but lower rates of repeat procedures (0.2% vs 2.0%), valve-in-valve deployments (0% vs 3.7%), and valve malpositioning (0% vs 2.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, use of the MEV compared with the SEV did not result in inferior outcomes for the primary safety end point or the primary effectiveness end point. These findings suggest that the MEV may be a useful addition for TAVR in high-risk patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02202434.

Prasugrel plus aspirin beyond 12 months is associated with improved outcomes after TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent placement.

BACKGROUND: The TAXUS Liberté Post Approval Study (TL-PAS) contributed patients treated with TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent and prasugrel to the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study (DAPT) that compared 12 and 30 months thienopyridine plus aspirin therapy after drug-eluting stents. METHODS AND RESULTS: Outcomes for 2191 TL-PAS patients enrolled into DAPT were assessed. The DAPT coprimary composite end point (death, myocardial infarction [MI], or stroke) was lower with 30 compared with 12 months prasugrel treatment (3.7% versus 8.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.407; P<0.001). Rates of death and stroke were similar between groups, but MI was significantly reduced with prolonged prasugrel treatment (1.9% versus 7.1%; HR, 0.255; P<0.001). The DAPT coprimary end point, stent thrombosis, was also lower with longer therapy (0.2% versus 2.9%; HR, 0.063; P<0.001). MI related to stent thrombosis (0% versus 2.6%; P<0.001) and occurring spontaneously (1.9% versus 4.5%; HR, 0.407; P=0.007) were both reduced with prolonged prasugrel. MI rates increased within 90 days of prasugrel cessation after both 12 and 30 months treatment. Composite Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) moderate or severe bleeds were modestly increased (2.4% versus 1.7%; HR, 1.438; P=0.234) but severe bleeds were not more frequent (0.3% versus 0.5%; HR, 0.549; P=0.471) in the prolonged treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Prasugrel and aspirin continued for 30 months reduced ischemic events for the TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent patient subset from DAPT through reductions in MI and stent thrombosis. Withdrawal of prasugrel was followed by an increase in MI after both 12 and 30 months therapy. The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel after TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent remains unknown, but appears to be >30 months. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00997503.

Rationale and design of the East-West late lumen loss study: Comparison of late lumen loss between Eastern and Western drug-eluting stent study cohorts.

BACKGROUND: The contemporary evaluation of novel drug-eluting stents (DES) includes mechanistic observations that characterize postdeployment stent behavior. Quantification of late lumen loss due to neointimal hyperplasia 8-13 months after stent implantation, via quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), constitutes such an observation and is required by most regulatory authorities. Late lumen loss, as determined by QCA, has been validated as a surrogate for clinical endpoints such as target vessel revascularization. The mechanistic response to DES has not been directly compared across predominantly Asian or Western populations, whereas understanding their comparability across geographic populations could enhance global DES evaluation. OBJECTIVE: The East-West late lumen loss study is designed to demonstrate whether the residual differences in late lumen loss, as assessed by QCA, is different between Eastern and Western DES recipients from studies with protocol angiography at 8-13 months of follow-up. METHODS: Data from independent core laboratories that have characterized angiographic late lumen loss in DES clinical trials with protocol follow-up angiography will be compiled and dichotomized into Eastern and Western populations. A prospectively developed propensity score model incorporating clinical and anatomic variables affecting late lumen loss will be used to adjust comparisons of QCA measurements. CONCLUSION: Documentation of whether there are clinically meaningful differences in mechanistic response to DES implantation across genetically unique geographies could facilitate both the quality and efficiency of global device evaluation requiring invasive follow-up for novel stent designs.

PLATINUM China: a prospective, randomized investigation of the platinum chromium everolimus-eluting stent in de novo coronary artery lesions.

OBJECTIVES: The PLATINUM China clinical trial evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the thin-strut, everolimus-eluting, platinum-chromium PROMUS™ Element™ stent (PtCr-EES) (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) for the treatment of patients in China. BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes from the PtCr-EES have not been evaluated in patients from China, nor has it been directly compared with the second-generation stainless steel paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS Liberté stent (PES) in a randomized head-to-head trial. Methods In this prospective, multicenter, single-blind, superiority trial, patients with a single de novo atherosclerotic coronary artery lesion were randomized 1:3 to receive either the PES or PtCr-EES. The primary endpoint was in-stent late loss at 9 months. RESULTS: Among 127 PES and 373 PtCr-EES patients (71.2% male; mean age 57.3 years), the primary endpoint of 9-month in-stent late loss was 0.40 ± 0.45 mm for PES versus 0.11 ± 0.36 mm for PtCr-EES (P < 0.001). In-stent % diameter stenosis was 22.20 ± 16.00% for PES versus 11.06 ± 13.86% for PtCr-EES (P < 0.001) at 9 months. The 1-year rate of death/MI was 1.6% (2/127) for PES versus 0% (0/371) for PtCr-EES (P = 0.06) and target vessel revascularization was 4.7% (6/127) for PES versus 2.7% (10/371) for PtCr-EES (P = 0.26). No stent thromboses occurred at 12 months in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest prospective angiographic evaluation conducted to date with this stent, the PROMUS Element PtCr-EES was superior to the TAXUS Liberté PES for the primary endpoint of late loss at 9 months, with low rates of clinical events at 1 year. Clinical follow-up will continue to 2 years.